Toews
Backstrom > not a top 3.
Crosby
RNH
Seguin
E. Staal
Spezza
Malkin
Stamkos
Giroux > not a top 3.
Tavares
Getzlaf > not a top 3.
Sedin
J. Thornton
Datsyuk > not a top 3.
Zetterberg > not a top 3.
M. Koivu > not a top 3.
Kopitar > not a top 3.
If we are lucky, Galchenyuk will be an equal among equals within that list, i.e. he will be a top 20 center.

Having a top 20 center in a 30 team league does not make you a contender.

never won anything, never shown any desire to win something, never will...

from Backstrom's wikipedia page, information that took all of 15 seconds to dig up...

"He won the World Championship when he represented Sweden in the 2006 World Championship. As of that tournament he is the youngest Swedish player ever in an Ice Hockey World Championship tournament. Bäckström played the last four games in the WC (roster spot held open for Daniel Alfredsson) and was directly appointed to the first line together with idols Henrik Zetterberg and Johan Franzén."

i swear, if people just took 15 seconds to either think, or actually look something up, before posting, we would all be saved by idiotic statements like the one above.

from Backstrom's wikipedia page, information that took all of 15 seconds to dig up...

"He won the World Championship when he represented Sweden in the 2006 World Championship. As of that tournament he is the youngest Swedish player ever in an Ice Hockey World Championship tournament. Bäckström played the last four games in the WC (roster spot held open for Daniel Alfredsson) and was directly appointed to the first line together with idols Henrik Zetterberg and Johan Franzén."

i swear, if people just took 15 seconds to either think, or actually look something up, before posting, we would all be saved by idiotic statements like the one above.

I suspect a lot of posters overestimate the Habs because they are Habs fans and not NHL fans. " we have gally, markov, pleks, price!!!" They do not realize that there are a lot of good players on othet teams too.

I suspect a lot of players overestimate the Habs because they are Habs fans and not NHL fans. " we have gally, markov, pleks, price!!!" They do not realize that there are a lot of good players on othet teams too.

let's see... how many NHL games you watch on average (yearly) ? non-Habs games that is...

I suspect a lot of players overestimate the Habs because they are Habs fans and not NHL fans. " we have gally, markov, pleks, price!!!" They do not realize that there are a lot of good players on othet teams too.

i dont watch many other teams games but i know when i watch montreal that theyre not that good. maybe its because im still stuck in the 70s and i always compare the team now to what it was then.

i see a small team that relies too much on finesse. its great if you have a lot of talent but when your slightly below average in that area and significantly below average in physical play....it spells disaster.

this team can be great in one game ( maybe for a few consecutive) but it always comes back to bite them that they dont excel in any area.

It does matter, if the guy is one of 5-6 other guys that are equally as important, and those 5-6 guys can all be acquired without tanking then you don't need to tank.

Nobody is arguing that only top picks win cups. We're arguing that they are an important ingredient to most cup winning teams. I don't care if Lafleur isn't as important as Dryden or Robinson... fact is he's a huge part of that team, just like Lemieux, Modano or Staal.

(And actually Dryden was traded for as a prosepct too)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sorinth

If he was the best player you could argue you can only get players that good with a high draft pick. If most of the core guys were high draft picks you could argue you can't get enough players any other way. But that's not the case.

I'm not trying to argue that you can't get players any other way. We all know you can. Hell there HAS to be stars picked elsewhere because there's only so many top picks to go around.

The difference is that you can't count on those picks to turn into stars the way you can if you have multiple top picks. You are better off with 3 top five picks than you are with 15 picks from 11-30. Five times as many picks and you'll STILL wind up with fewer superstars. And finding them beyond the first round is like finding a needle in a haystack.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sorinth

Which is proof that you don't need to intentionally tank. You can still try for the playoffs every year, and when it's not your year you trade away UFAs and try again next year.

We wasted YEARS doing this. It got us nowhere. Why do you want to continue down this path when we've seen that it doesn't work?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sorinth

No the worst case scenario is you put your prospects into roles they can't succeed in. They lose confidence, stagnate and we lose them for nothing. We could also develop a losing culture which is often hard to change without a drastic overhaul.

You're risking a lot more.

We've already developed a culture of apathy here. We've developed a culture where 8th place is the bar for success. I'd much rather see a GM come in and work towards building a cup... we aren't risking anything but 8th place.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sorinth

I understand perfectly well, it's just you're speculating wildly so why would I accept that.

Before the lockout we were a budget team that couldn't compete with the big spenders. Even if we had tanked for years we wouldn't of won anything because you needed a huge payroll or tons of luck. So what happened in the late 90s early 2000s is irrelevant. The landscape is completly different now.

You seem to always ignore this crucial point. Even when you are fighting for 8th every year, some years things will go wrong and when they do that's when you sell UFAs and make rebuilding moves. Just like we did last year.

You can make rebuilding moves and fight for the playoffs every year.

You say it's lead us nowhere yet we now have a franchise Goalie, 2 1st line forwards, and a top pairing D. On top of that we have a bunch of quality vets, and a relatively good prospect pool. How has it led us nowhere?

We have a franchise goalie because we won a onetime lottery with a top five pick. We had no business getting that pick and lucked out. He was our first top five in 20 years man! And.... he just happens to be our best player.

Yet for some reason you want to argue against rebuilding? Why?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sorinth

Then you need another dose of common sense. Every player is available if you are willing/able to overpay. If someone offered 10 1st round picks for Souray do you really think Gainey would've said no thanks I want to make the playoffs? No he would've taken the deal and run. We don't know what value Gainey placed on Souray, was it 10 picks? 5? 3? We can assume it was more than 1 because no doubt teams offered at least that. So when you say if you don't get the value you want then don't make the deal. That's exactly what we've done. You can argue how much value a UFA Souray had to the Habs but don't say only trade players if you get good value and then complain we didn't trade players when we could've.

Dumping half the team and then getting Gomez, Gionta, Cammalleri, Moen, Spacek, Gill was rebuilding. It just wasn't rebuilding through the draft. If instead of Gomez we had gotten a legitimate #1 C then we would likely have been contenders the last couple of years. We finished 6th with Gomez giving us 37pts, if he could've put up 80 we would've easily have been fighting at the top. So it could've worked if we used the capspace wisely. Boston did and became a contender. NYRs dumped some bad contracts and picked up better players and are now contenders. So it works just like rebuilding through the draft can work.

It's not rebuilding man... As for Souray, again see what we dealt Rivet for. Yet somehow you're arguing that we couldn't have done better?

We didn't want to finish 9th. We wanted 8th so we held onto him. Then we missed and he left. That's the kind of short term thinking we saw for years and it's killed us.

Last year was no different. Our GM went for quick fixes and desperation moves designed to get us to 8th. He didn't care about the future. Fortunately he sucked at his job and we got a top 3 pick out of it but we still wasted assets and saddled ourselves with stupid contracts along the way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sorinth

Because they are not being wasted.

Yeah dude, they are. We are squeezing the trade value out of these guys as we pursue 8th place and a 1st round knockout.

Building towards a cup is not the same as scrambling to make 8th. You have to take longer term moves if you want to win.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sorinth

They could but probably have less of a shot then we do because it's less likely Reimer gets hot compared to Price.

Nobody is arguing that only top picks win cups. We're arguing that they are an important ingredient to most cup winning teams. I don't care if Lafleur isn't as important as Dryden or Robinson... fact is he's a huge part of that team, just like Lemieux, Modano or Staal.

(And actually Dryden was traded for as a prosepct too)

I'm not trying to argue that you can't get players any other way. We all know you can. Hell there HAS to be stars picked elsewhere because there's only so many top picks to go around.

The difference is that you can't count on those picks to turn into stars the way you can if you have multiple top picks. You are better off with 3 top five picks than you are with 15 picks from 11-30. Five times as many picks and you'll STILL wind up with fewer superstars. And finding them beyond the first round is like finding a needle in a haystack.

We wasted YEARS doing this. It got us nowhere. Why do you want to continue down this path when we've seen that it doesn't work?

We've already developed a culture of apathy here. We've developed a culture where 8th place is the bar for success. I'd much rather see a GM come in and work towards building a cup... we aren't risking anything but 8th place.

We have a franchise goalie because we won a onetime lottery with a top five pick. We had no business getting that pick and lucked out. He was our first top five in 20 years man! And.... he just happens to be our best player.

Yet for some reason you want to argue against rebuilding? Why?

It's not rebuilding man... As for Souray, again see what we dealt Rivet for. Yet somehow you're arguing that we couldn't have done better?

We didn't want to finish 9th. We wanted 8th so we held onto him. Then we missed and he left. That's the kind of short term thinking we saw for years and it's killed us.

Last year was no different. Our GM went for quick fixes and desperation moves designed to get us to 8th. He didn't care about the future. Fortunately he sucked at his job and we got a top 3 pick out of it but we still wasted assets and saddled ourselves with stupid contracts along the way.

Yeah dude, they are. We are squeezing the trade value out of these guys as we pursue 8th place and a 1st round knockout.

Building towards a cup is not the same as scrambling to make 8th. You have to take longer term moves if you want to win.

I understand what your saying, but doing that increase the risk of it all blowing up in your face and not being bad enough to draft really high and not being good enough to get into the playoffs.

I don't care if we don't fall into a top five spot man. If we're trading vets for picks and prospects that's good enough. If the team manages to snag 8th that's fine. It's not about trying to lose...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sorinth

What you don't seem to get that going for the playoffs doesn't prevent you from making your team better in the long run as well.

If we make the playoffs... great. Shows that we're on the right track with our kids. At least we're dealing assets away and brigning in prospects at the same time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sorinth

So long as you are not giving up good youth/picks when getting guys like Kaberle then it doesn't put us further from the cup. How does keeping Spacek get us closer to the cup? You woudn't want us to spend the cap space anyways since that would increase the odds of us not ending up in the basement again. In fact if we can get any kind of a pick for Kaberle then it helps us long term. Kaberle will be gone this summer so he won't handicap us for our future window.

It doesn't. Keeping Spacek doesn't help at all, he should be traded... for picks! Not for Thomas freaking Kaberle!

Trading for Kaberle does absolutely nothing but perpetuate medicority. If you aren't a contender and you're going to deal away assets you do it for future value not for MORE mediocre over the hill players esp when they have dumb contracts. Even if Kaberle had worked out and got us to 8th... it just puts us further away from the cup because now we're stuck with this guy when we could've used our assets to trade for picks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sorinth

Maybe this will help explain it better, getting the prospect doesn't get you closer to the cup, it gets you a small chance to get closer to the cup. And there are negatives with trading the vet such as hurting the development of prospects which is why it's risky.

I have no problems with taking one step back to take two step forwards. But that's not reality, it's take one step back for a chance to take two steps forward. The % chance depends on how good of a pick/prospect you get in return. A late 1st gives you a small chance, a top pick gives a very good chance.

And we've already told you it's a calculated risk. Not all the picks/prospects will work out but some will.

And you're dealing away players you weren't going to win with anyway. You seem to think we're missing out on something if we deal away vets who won't win cups with us. We aren't. We are working towards building a cup for the future.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnostic

this is 2013 not 2011, the debate about Kaberle's value is over. He's untradeable.

If we are lucky, Galchenyuk will be an equal among equals within that list, i.e. he will be a top 20 center.

Having a top 20 center in a 30 team league does not make you a contender.

It is a good start, but it is not enough.

That's right. Fortunately we've got Price and Subban which makes me optimistic but if Galchneyuk doesn't become the player we hope he will be then we're back to square one. That's why we should be stacking the deck...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miller Time

from Backstrom's wikipedia page, information that took all of 15 seconds to dig up...

"He won the World Championship when he represented Sweden in the 2006 World Championship. As of that tournament he is the youngest Swedish player ever in an Ice Hockey World Championship tournament. Bäckström played the last four games in the WC (roster spot held open for Daniel Alfredsson) and was directly appointed to the first line together with idols Henrik Zetterberg and Johan Franzén."

i swear, if people just took 15 seconds to either think, or actually look something up, before posting, we would all be saved by idiotic statements like the one above.

that's what La did and they ended up having to play 3 more series...sucks.

are you really trying to imply that a "playoffs at all cost" strategy is the best path for a team to take?

in a cap-less, or luxury tax environment... sure.

but in the tight cap system that the NHL operates, as much as a fluke run is always possible (and in fact, happens far more frequently than most would like to admit, at least to the finals), I would argue that a management team (especially one with the assets at our disposal - cap spending, big budget for team services/staff related spending, allure of large/historic hockey market) focused on building a long-term, perennially contending team, is much better off strategically treating each season, then being content with "just getting in".

Gainey/Gauthier obviously disagreed... hence the multitude of assets we mishandled, and the joy of getting to watch guys like Gomez, Cammalleri & Kaberle play large (at least financially speaking) roles on our team and leading us to the absolute basement of our conference.

and where can i get a bit of what's in your pipe cuz that shyte must be DAMN potent

guess reading comprehension...

I'll help you out though. DAC"lucky"hampion said I didnt think Backstrom, I asked for him to provide a link where I said that... wich he failed to do - just like you did, at least - contrary to you, he had the intelligence not to say anything...

I don't care if we don't fall into a top five spot man. If we're trading vets for picks and prospects that's good enough. If the team manages to snag 8th that's fine. It's not about trying to lose...

If we make the playoffs... great. Shows that we're on the right track with our kids. At least we're dealing assets away and brigning in prospects at the same time.

It doesn't. Keeping Spacek doesn't help at all, he should be traded... for picks! Not for Thomas freaking Kaberle!

Trading for Kaberle does absolutely nothing but perpetuate medicority. If you aren't a contender and you're going to deal away assets you do it for future value not for MORE mediocre over the hill players esp when they have dumb contracts. Even if Kaberle had worked out and got us to 8th... it just puts us further away from the cup because now we're stuck with this guy when we could've used our assets to trade for picks.

And we've already told you it's a calculated risk. Not all the picks/prospects will work out but some will.

And you're dealing away players you weren't going to win with anyway. You seem to think we're missing out on something if we deal away vets who won't win cups with us. We aren't. We are working towards building a cup for the future.

I think you're right. We got stuck with the Queen of Spades.

That's right. Fortunately we've got Price and Subban which makes me optimistic but if Galchneyuk doesn't become the player we hope he will be then we're back to square one. That's why we should be stacking the deck...

Or you could put those users on ignore and save yourself the trouble.

exactly, only talk to those who are already agreeing with the concept of tanking - put the others on ignore. Guaranteed to never be proven wrong, logic

I'll help you out though. DAC"lucky"hampion said I didnt think Backstrom, I asked for him to provide a link where I said that... wich he failed to do - just like you did, at least - contrary to you, he had the intelligence not to say anything...

wow... i mean this is bordering on delusional commentary...

my bad teacher, how could i have been so stupid as to not understand that when someone says this about a player:

Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI never won anything, never shown any desire to win something, never will...

they actually think the player they are talking about is really good.

i mean, i don't think I could make up this crap even if I tried.

or maybe it all makes some sort of twisted sense.

Good players = guys who never win anything & never show any desire
Bad players = guys who win a lot and show tons of desire (also the types who get drafted high)

therefore not worrying about acquiring any elite prospects with winning & desire in their background, instead focusing on guys who won something once and now make a ton of money (gomez/gionta/kaberle come to mind) and keeping them at all cost, IS the path to success.